Examination of Witness (Questions 320-328)
17 DECEMBER 2003
BARONESS ASHTON
OF UPHOLLAND
Q320 Mr Gibb: I am not very comfortable
that a quarter of children cannot read properly in this country.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
It is very important that we get as many children who can read
properly as we possibly can.
Q321 Mr Gibb: But 25% are going to secondary
school and not reaching the required level of reading. And there
is something seriously wrong to say you think you have the right
balance and combination and it is all fine is a bit complacent.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
Through the Chair, I do not believe I said it is all fine. I think
what I said was we have to develop the National Literacy Strategy;
we have looked at the issues of phonics and we will develop that
programme in the future. Only 75% is not good enough, though I
am proud that 75% can do it.[7]
The average school now is better than the best school was in 1997—I
make no point other than that. It is important we are not complacent
and we carry on doing it, but what is important is to do it properly
and not leap to conclusions that if a school does this it is something
that is only connected to one aspect of what they are doing. The
point about the literacy strategy too is to make sure it is taught
in a sense through the curriculum and across the curriculum. We
need to understand that and explore that and support those schools
who are doing less well.
Q322 Jeff Ennis: On the same theme of
reading, and not being complacent, it is not acceptable that a
quarter of the kids cannot read properly when they come out of
primary school, but are these not the highest levels that we have
ever had in this country in state schools in terms of literacy?
Following on from that, in terms of trying to be more successful
in the teaching of reading in primary schools, are not initiatives
such as the paired reading schemes, where primary schools encourage
parents to come in and read with the slow readers, not just benefiting
the kids themselves but also encouraging the parents to get involved
within the educational system and think about going on to become
a child minder or a nursery assistant? And is it not examples
like that which we need to promote as a Government in schools?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
I agree wholeheartedly, but I think what Mr Gibb was driving at
was in a sense saying how do you focus government activity that
recognises all these different things? There are children arriving
at school with very different experiences of the written and spoken
word in English for all sorts of reasons, so it is also about
recognising, firstly, that the Early Years approach that develops
their language and speaking skills, the early part of it, is very
important but (b) if a child does not have experience of being
read to either as a baby or a young child or a parent who themselves
cannot read, then you do have to address those broader issues.
Some schools are more successful at that than others. The ambition
is that every school becomes as successful as the best, and what
we want is every adult to be able to read and write, and every
child. Also, we are looking to see how close children are to be
able to reach those levels of attainment. Achieving Level 4 at
the end of Key Stage 2 is where we recognise children can access
the secondary curriculum which is why it is very important and
that is why in year 7, the first year of secondary school, it
is really important we continue that work. What is also interesting
is to see those children at Level 3 make the progress in year
7 because they get additional support either between moving to
primary or secondary or in that first year, so it is a raft of
things that really matter and I would hate to mislead the Committee
in saying I was in any way complacent. Though the strategies do
work, they do need refining, and we will work on them.
Q323 Mr Turner: Minister, 20 years ago
I found myself with a child suffering an autistic spectrum disorder
in my class with neither warning nor knowledge nor training. In
the last 10 years the number of children suffering has multiplied
by ten and only 5% of teachers have any training in dealing with
pupils with this disorder. What is happening to put that right?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: There
are a number of things I want to do about that. Firstly, we are
trying to identify for the first time exactly where our children
with different special educational needs are in schools because
a lot of information about them is not retained in a form that
enables us to target more effectively the resources we need to
do in terms of training. The second aspect is to make sure that,
through a combination of the school work force that we have available,
we enable not only teachers but also our teaching assistants to
develop more expertise in working with children. Thirdly, that
our special schools, who have enormous expertise but are often
not available to the mainstream settings, are made more available
through turning some of them into centres of outreach and centres
of excellency that can be accessed in terms of training. So that
is a combination to address what is still not a satisfactory position.
Q324 Mr Turner: 1141 cases of refusal
to assess pupils were registered with SENDIST last year on which
only 286 decisions had to be made, presumably because in many
cases the local education authority had settled and agreed, in
40% of those cases in the last six weeks before the tribunal date
in a 4-6 month process. Do you think that is satisfactory?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
I do not think it is satisfactory. What I want to do is create
confidence in the system which I believe is lacking, particularly
for families, about what they can expect if they have a child
with special educational needs in the education centre. Just going
back to Early Years for a second, where we are successful in developing
support for children's special educational needs and/or disabilities,
the need for parents to go to tribunals or, indeed, to have statements
is reduced because the system kicks in earlier, supports the child
through Early Years, and then into primary and secondary school
as part and parcel of what the system does. Successful interventions
in special needs in a sense mean you have fewer interventions
at that kind of level. For some parents their lack of confidence
in the system means they feel the only way forward is to go for
an assessment, and we need to get underneath that and address
it, which some local authorities are beginning to do, about giving
them the confidence that the resources will be provided for their
child within the constraints that exist, and that is a fact, but
that are appropriate for the child's needs.
Q325 Mr Turner: I am quite happy with
that approach for the future but the problem is where we are now.
In my own constituency, within twelve months someone appealed
to a tribunal and was successful, but the authority failed to
deliver. They appealed again and the authority tried to have her
application struck out; she was successful at the hearing. When
the hearing on the full appeal came, she was successful again.
Again, it has not been implemented and she has registered a new
appeal. I am not asking you to comment on that case because I
thought it was unique but, reading the National Autistic Society's
report, they say: "We have helped parents who have appealed
against a refusal to assess their child, then appealed against
a refusal to statement and appealed for the third time against
the contents of the statement", and only 60% of statements,
parents say, are fully implemented. Surely the tribunal system
is not delivering if LEAs are not delivering what they agree before
the tribunal, or what the tribunal requires them to deliver?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
There are two points on that: one is it is a tragedy that parents
have to keep going back into the system and see that as the only
route to getting provision for children. That is where I start
my work in a sense—trying to develop a system that means
we do not end up in this circle of parents wanting provision that
is not provided or cannot be provided. The blame does not work
because it is not always about one party being mean or rotten
to another party in these circumstances; it is about what can
be provided within resources available. I do not make any excuses
by that but it is important that we look at the system and make
it work better for all the parties involved, most importantly
for the children. Also, once a tribunal has made its decision
it is for local authorities to implement that, and where I am
involved in that we would ensure it, but I do not get much correspondence
on this issue in terms of the failure to implement. It is quite
important that we look at the role of the school in that process,
too, in terms of where they are able to implement and support
the child effectively, and what I want to see is a situation where,
from very early on, the absolute earliest possible interventions
and identifications are made to support children, so we do not
have what can sometimes feel to families like years of having
to go through a system which they feel is not geared to support
them, and to do that in a way that brings it down to the school
and the Local Education Authority where that is appropriate and
the family being able to develop the right kind of approach for
that child.
Q326 Mr Turner: I admire the objective
but 76% of parents' appeals are upheld. They should never reach
the tribunal if they are upheld because the Local Education Authority
or the school should be doing its job before we get into the tribunal.
What is going wrong and, more importantly, can you be a bit more
specific about what the Local Education Authority should be doing
to get its assessment right and timely, because it is clear that
it is not happening?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
I think there are a number of points to that. The first is we
have to look at what the role of government is in working with
local authorities because there is a difference in the approach
that different local authorities take and while, again, I am not
taking the view that you need sameness, you do need consistency,
because one of the things that will be said to you, I am sure,
as an MP is that it depends where you live, what you get, so we
really have to get away from that and be much more consistent
in the approach. The reason I am trying to give you the thrust
is partly because we are about to produce this new strategy on
special needs in the next few weeks, and what we know is that
where authorities have developed strong and good relationships
between the schools and the parents and worked together, you have
fewer appeals, you get fewer statements because you do not need
to get a statement to get support for the child, and you get better
collaborative working between all parties. I want to expand and
extend that to also include special schools so we get away from
the "either/or" to the "both/and" approach
to children so they get the additional support they need, and
to get to the point where the tribunal is always an important
and valuable safety net and backstop but that we get underneath
why it is that we get these appeals for assessment, what is going
wrong, why some are concentrated in particular areas of the country
and not others, and what we can do to make this more even. I agree
it is a problem—I do not deny that for a second—and
that we need to do more to support all the parties in this but
particularly the children, and I agree that where we have to move
to a tribunal being involved either to make the authority assess
or to make the statement, in a sense it is a failure of the system,
but I do not think we can get there by simply having one edict
or one rule on this because it is quite complex to get underneath.
What is critical to me is to look at what are the big things that
make a difference to a child's special educational needs, which
are educational attainment and outcomes, which are about early
intervention, early action, and about making sure we take the
barriers away that prevent them from learning well, and about
better teaching and learning experiences for those children too,
so you know what is expected and what can be achieved. They are
about support, as you described, in the classroom for children
who have either an autistic spectrum or somewhere else.
Q327 Mr Turner: But the problem is you
are not giving me confidence of the kind I give to parents that
they will not need multiple appeals because of non-delivery or
failure to assess in future?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
That is my ambition, but I do not think I can create that overnight.
It will take time but that is what I want to achieve—a system
that works for children that does not need all of this to happen
before children get any support.
Q328 Chairman: Thank you, Andrew. That
was a good line of questioning with interesting answers, Minister.
Can we thank you for your attendance; this has been a good session;
we have learned a lot and given you some food for thought, and
can I wish all of you a very merry Christmas and we will see you
all back in Committee full of vim and vigour after the Christmas
celebrations.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland:
And to you, and thank you very much.
7 Note by witness: In fact the situation is
that even the lowest achieving LEA in English and maths tests
is now achieving better in English and maths than the average
achieving LEA of 1996. Back
|
